A point of contention was the triviality of the change and thus the logic of starting the clock on the original formulation.
“Successive Indian courts have ruled that Glivec, also known as imatinib, was ineligible for a patent because it was a so-called salt – a subtly modified version of a related compound that had been previously patented. Novartis has challenged the interpretation.
Mr Herrling – formerly Novartis’s head of research and development – said that the original form of the drug was too unstable and unsafe ever to be tested in humans, and it was the 'salt' version that was ultimately approved for human use worldwide" [1]
Note that Novartis threatened, yesterday, “to stop supplies of new medicines to India if the country’s top court refuses on Monday to grant a patent for Glivec, its cancer drug.”
>>Note that Novartis threatened, yesterday, “to stop supplies of new medicines to India if the country’s top court refuses on Monday to grant a patent for Glivec, its cancer drug.”
Trust me as an Indian I can tell you these supreme court rulings are pretty much a engraving on the stone which nobody apart from the parliament of India can erase.
What this basically means is the supreme court ruling stands final without any change.
Will be interesting to see how Novartis responds. Last time our country faced these situations(sanctions etc) we made attempts to not depend on others and be self sufficient.
The net result is it has been beneficial to us and disastrous to companies in the west[Read: Growth of IT industry, space research, defense self sufficiency].
If Novartis decides to take these extortion tactics. The Government of India might as well invest heavily on pharmaceutical research, and come out with some real alternatives and then compete with their western counterparts globally.
A lot of people will suffer, but this is the likely outcome I see, Given the history.
The rich Indians will go abroad for treatment. The poor Indians can't afford the drug anyway. The middle class will be squeezed, but they will manage through relatives, friends etc.
It's not at all clear why Mr Herrling's point is relevant at all.
It comes out to "we patented something and prevented others from doing anything related due to the patent, but it turned out we couldn't sell that version". This seems like "tough shit", wait to patent a version that works, you got the benefit of the patent.
“Successive Indian courts have ruled that Glivec, also known as imatinib, was ineligible for a patent because it was a so-called salt – a subtly modified version of a related compound that had been previously patented. Novartis has challenged the interpretation.
Mr Herrling – formerly Novartis’s head of research and development – said that the original form of the drug was too unstable and unsafe ever to be tested in humans, and it was the 'salt' version that was ultimately approved for human use worldwide" [1]
Note that Novartis threatened, yesterday, “to stop supplies of new medicines to India if the country’s top court refuses on Monday to grant a patent for Glivec, its cancer drug.”
[1] http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/c377e20a-99eb-11e2-83ca-00144...